Another debatable question arises when one contemplates the whole biosphere, the conjoined life of the earth.How could it have turned out to possess such stability and coherence,resembling as it does a sort of enormous developing embryo,with nothing but chance events to determine its emergence?Lovelock and Margulis, facing this problem, have proposed the Gaia Hypothesis,which is, in brief, that the earth is itself a form of life,"a complex entity involving the Earth's biosphere, atmosphere, oceans and soil;the totality constituting a feedback or cybernetic systemwhich seeks an optimal physical and chemical environment for life on this planet."Lovelock postulates, in addition,that "the physical and chemical condition of the surface of the Earth, of the atmosphere, and of the oceans has been an is actively made fit and comfortable by the presence of life itself."This notion is beginning to stir up a few signs of storm,and if it catches on, as I think it will,we will soon find the biological community split into fuming factions,one side saying that the evolved biosphere displays evidences of design and purpose,the other decrying such heresy.I believe that students should learn as much as they can about the argument.One more current battle involving the unknown is between sociobiologists and antisociobiologists,
当我们把整个生物圈，即地球上连在一起的整个生命加以仔细考虑时，就会出现另外一个可争论的问题。在只有偶然事件起决定作用的情况下，地球生物圈怎么会像一种巨大的发育着的胚胎一样，具有如此的稳定性和一致性呢？面对这一问题，洛夫洛克和马古利斯提出了盖亚假说。简言之，这个假说认为，地球本身是一种生命形式，“一个复杂的统一体，它包括地球生物圈、大气层、海洋和土壤；其总和构成一个反馈或控制系统，这个系统为地球上的生命寻求最佳的物理和化学环境。”洛夫洛克还假定，“生命本身的存在一直而且现在仍然积极在使地球表面、大气层和海洋的物理及化学条件变得适宜和舒服。”一些迹象表明这一见解已开始激起风暴。如果这一见解流行起来――我认为会这样的――我们不久就会见到生物学界分裂为怒气冲冲的两派，一派说，生物圈的进化显示出是有计划有意图地进行的，而另一派则诋毁这种异端邪说。我认为学生应该尽可能多地了解这一争论。目前正在进行的也是牵涉到未知世界的另一场论战，是在社会生物学家和反社会生物学家之间进行的。
暂无注释
